It may be imagined, however,
that although Christ was conscious, from the beginning, of his calling to realize
the idea of the kingdom of God, the plan of his work may
have been modified from time to time according to the varying results which depended
upon the vacillating temper of the public mind; that at first, perhaps, he hoped
to find the greater part of the Jewish nation ready to receive him; and designed,
under this supposition, to separate the incorrigible from the better part, and collect
the latter into a Theocratic community under his government; and that he expected
that the kingdom of God, once seated firmly in this way,
would, by the might of its prevailing spirit of Divine life, by degrees transform
all other nations into the same kingdom. In
83fact, what an incalculable influence might a nation,
thoroughly imbued with the spirit of Christianity and illustrating Christianity
in all its relations, exert toward the moral regeneration of the rest of mankind!
A light indeed would it be, not hid under a bushel, but throwing its beams on all
sides into the surrounding darkness: the salt and the leaven, truly, of all mankind.
And some,127127De Wette and Hase. Paulus also, with
some modifications. in fact, assert that Christ cherished these hopes when he first appeared
in public. Hence, say they, the joyous feeling with which he announced the “acceptable
year” in the synagogue at Nazareth;128128Luke, iv., 17, seq. hence his purpose, manifested in the Sermon
on the Mount, to give to the people new Theocratic statutes in accordance with his
higher stand-point; hence his promise to the apostles that they should govern, under
him, the new Theocratic community;129129Matt., xix., 28. hence, too, his last lamentation over Jerusalem,
that he had so often tried to save the nation which ought to have submitted to his
guidance. All which, they say, presupposes a belief on his part that the results
might have been different had the people listened to his voice, and that he expected
more of them to listen to him; that the aim of his ministry was altered when he
found the resistance more stubborn and general than he had supposed; and that, from
the course of events themselves, he learned, in the light of the Divine Spirit,
that the plan for the establishment of the kingdom of God
which the Divine counsels had formed, was such, that he himself must submit to the
power of his enemies, and rise victorious from his sufferings; while the kingdom
itself was only to advance by slow degrees, and after many combats, to its final
triumph.

Yet, after all, these reasonings are only specious, not solid. Even the
most important of them rather opposes than sustains the theory they are adduced
to support. It is true, there is such a thing as a holy enthusiasm for a Divine
idea, which is blind to all difficulties, or deems that it can gain an easy victory.
Such, however, was not the enthusiasm of Christ for his Divine work; on the contrary,
he combined with it a discretion which fully comprehended the opposition he must
encounter from the prevailing opinions and feelings of the times. He was far from
trusting to the momentary impulses under which the people, excited by his words
and actions, sought to join themselves to him. He readily distinguished, with that
searching glance that pierced the depths of men’s hearts, the few who came to him,
drawn of the Father and following an inward consciousness of God,
from those who sought him with carnal feelings, to obtain that which he came not
to bestow. How did he check the ardour of his disciples, when he rebuked the false
self-confidence inspired by a transient enthusiasm, and reminded them of their weakness!
There was no extravagance in his demands upon
84men; nothing exaggerated in his hopes of the
future. Every where we see not only a conscious possession of the Divine power to
overcome the world, which he was to impart to humanity, but also of the obstacles
it should meet with from the old nature in which the principle of sin was yet active.
This was the spirit which passed over from him to the Apostles, and which constituted
the peculiar essence of Christian ethics. CHRIST, while as yet surrounded only by
a handful of faithful followers, describes the renewing power which the seed that
he had sown would exert on the life of humanity; yet, brilliant as the prospect
is, his eyes are not dazzled by it; he sees, at the same time, how impurity will
mix itself with the work of God, and how clouds will obscure
it. Could He whose quick glance thus saw the depths of men’s hearts, and took in
at once the present and the future, who knew so well the corrupt carnality of the
Jewish nation before he entered on his public ministry, so far deceive himself as
to suppose that he could suddenly transform the larger part of such a nation into
a true people of God? He that
searched men’s hearts and knew what was in man could not be ignorant that his
severest battles were to be fought with the prevalent depravity of men; and in
connexion with these struggles, how natural was it for him to look forward to
the death which he should suffer in the faithful performance of his calling!
Even at an early date he intimated the violent death by which he was to be torn
from the happy fellowship of his disciples, leaving them behind him in tears and
sorrow.130130Matt., ix., 15. Hase
says, indeed, that these words do not imply necessarily an approaching violent death, but might
be uttered in view of the common lot of mortals. But, in the first place, Jesus,
if he applied to himself the Old Testament idea of the Messiah, could not believe
that he would be torn by natural death from the Theocratic community which he should
found among the Jews, and thus leave it to the direction of others; but must expect
(if he hoped to found an external Theocracy) always to remain present as Theocratic
king. (This applies, also, to what Hase says (2d edit. of his Leben Jesu,
p. 89), in opposition to his previously expressed views.) Again, it would be
strange indeed for a man of thirty to express himself to older men, in reference
to the common end of mortals, in such language as the following: “Now is your time for festal
joy; for when your friend shall be removed, it will be time for fasting and sorrow.” The whole connexion of the passage shows
that Jesus did not expect to part from
them under happy circumstances, but amid many conflicts and sufferings.

His temptation, the historical truth
and import of which we have shown, makes it clear that he had decided, before he
commenced his public labours, not to establish the kingdom of God
in a mere outward way by miraculous power. And this is further shown by his assigning,
in the first epoch of his ministry, to John the Baptist, whom he called the first
among the prophets, a subordinate place in relation to the new era of religion;
for this could only have been done in view of John’s in ability fully to comprehend
the essential feature of this new era, viz.; the spiritual developement of the kingdom
of God from within. And
85again, in reference to John he said, “Blessed is he,
whosoever shall not be offended in me;” evidently presupposing that John’s Old Testament
views would be offended at the new era; a presupposition which refers to the new
spiritual growth of the Divine kingdom. It is, therefore, undeniable that from the
beginning Christ aimed at this new developement of that kingdom.

We find further
proof of this in all the parables which treat of the progress of his kingdom, and
the effects of his truth upon human nature, viz., the parables of the mustard seed,
of the leaven, of the fire which he had come to kindle upon earth, all which were
designed to illustrate the distinction between the Old Testament form of the Theocracy
and that of Christ; to illustrate a developement which was not at once to exhibit
an external stately fabric; but to commence with apparently small beginnings, and
yet ever to propagate itself by a mighty power working outwardly from within; and
to regenerate all things, and thus appropriate them to itself. All these parables
presuppose the renewal of human nature by a new and pervading principle of spiritual
life; and imply that the kingdom of God. cannot be
visibly realized among men until they become subjects of this renewal. To the
same effect was Christ’s saying (which we shall further examine hereafter), “neither do men
put new wine into old skins, else the skins break and the wine runneth out.” He
who uttered such truths, involving a steadfast and connected system of thought,
could not have set out with the purpose of establishing an outward kingdom, and
have afterward been induced by circumstances to change his plan in so short a time.
What an immense revolution in his mental habits and course of thinking must a few
months have produced, on such a supposition! It would be, indeed, a gross misapprehension
of the precepts given in the Sermon on the Mount to interpret them literally as
laws laid down for an outward Theocratic kingdom. Such an interpretation would involve
the possibility of a struggle between Good and Evil in the kingdom of
God; such as can never take place in Messiahs reign, if
it be realized according to its idea. The form of a state cannot be thought of in
connexion with this kingdom; a state presupposes a relation to transgression; an
outward law, the forms of judicature, the administration of justice are essential
to its organization. But all these can have no place in the perfect kingdom of Christ;
a community whose whole principle of life is love. Laws intended for the free mind
lose their import when their observance is compelled by external penalties of any
kind whatever. More of this view hereafter, when we come to treat especially of
the Sermon on the Mount.

Nor is a change in Christ’s feelings to be in any wise
admitted. The year of joy [the acceptable year, Luke, iv., 19] did not refer to the
happy results which he hoped to attain, but to the blessed contents of
86the announcement with which he commenced his
labours; the substance of the message itself was joyful, whether the dispositions
of the people would make it a source of joy to them, or not. And even on his first
proclamation at Nazareth, the hostility of the carnally-minded multitude could have
enabled him to prognosticate the general temper with which the whole people would
receive him. It follows by no means, from the wo which he uttered over his loved
Jerusalem (Luke, xiii., 34, 35), that he had hoped at first to find acceptance with
the entire nation, and to make Jerusalem the real seat of his Theocratic government.
Yet, although he could not save the nation as a whole, he offered his warnings to
the whole, leaving it to the issue to decide who were willing to hear his voice.

130Matt., ix., 15. Hase
says, indeed, that these words do not imply necessarily an approaching violent death, but might
be uttered in view of the common lot of mortals. But, in the first place, Jesus,
if he applied to himself the Old Testament idea of the Messiah, could not believe
that he would be torn by natural death from the Theocratic community which he should
found among the Jews, and thus leave it to the direction of others; but must expect
(if he hoped to found an external Theocracy) always to remain present as Theocratic
king. (This applies, also, to what Hase says (2d edit. of his Leben Jesu,
p. 89), in opposition to his previously expressed views.) Again, it would be
strange indeed for a man of thirty to express himself to older men, in reference
to the common end of mortals, in such language as the following: “Now is your time for festal
joy; for when your friend shall be removed, it will be time for fasting and sorrow.” The whole connexion of the passage shows
that Jesus did not expect to part from
them under happy circumstances, but amid many conflicts and sufferings.